tech-leads-club

Opinionated Rails conventions: rich models, concerns, CRUD-everything, state-as-records, minimal dependencies, Minitest with fixtures. Load this skill BEFORE any code-level thinking, not only before editing a file. It is required the moment a task touches Rails code in ANY way: designing or even just discussing a data model, schema, migration, entity, association, field, validation, class, or method name; writing, planning, reviewing, analyzing, testing, debugging, or refactoring; or proposing any model, table, column, route, or code snippet inline in chat. If you are about to name a model or sketch a column you are already in scope, even in an exploratory back-and-forth where no file is written yet. Do not let a "we're just discussing" framing defer it. Do NOT use for non-Rails backends, NestJS, or general architecture (use nestjs-modular-monolith or coding-guidelines).

When the user wants to reduce churn, build expansion revenue, automate customer success, or optimize net revenue retention. Also use when the user mentions 'churn,' 'retention,' 'expansion revenue,' 'upsell,' 'NRR,' 'net revenue retention,' 'customer success,' 'land and expand,' 'closed-lost,' or 'renewal.' This skill covers expansion and retention systems from usage triggers through automated customer success. Do NOT use for technical implementation, code review, or software architecture.

Scores how completely an implementation fulfills a PRD/spec, case by case, and produces a single comparable final grade. Invoke only when explicitly named (e.g. run spec-driven-eval); do not auto-trigger. Use when benchmarking spec-driven implementations, grading acceptance criteria, evaluating whether a feature was 100% implemented, comparing multiple implementations of the same PRD, or auditing implementation and test coverage (unit and e2e) against product requirements. Do NOT use for planning or building features (use tlc-spec-driven), writing PRDs, or general code review unrelated to a spec.

Specialist in designing and implementing scalable modular monolith architectures using NestJS with DDD, Clean Architecture, and CQRS patterns. Use when building modular monolith backends, designing bounded contexts, creating domain modules, implementing event-driven module communication, or when user mentions "modular monolith", "bounded contexts", "module boundaries", "DDD", "CQRS", "clean architecture NestJS", or "monolith to microservices". Do NOT use for simple CRUD APIs, frontend work, or general NestJS questions without architectural context.

Creates comprehensive Technical Design Documents (TDD) following industry standards with mandatory sections, optional sections, and interactive gathering of missing information.

Apply when writing, modifying, or reviewing code. Behavioral guidelines to reduce common LLM coding mistakes. Triggers on implementation tasks, code changes, refactoring, bug fixes, or feature development.

Senior React Native and Expo engineer for building production-ready cross-platform mobile apps. Use when building React Native components, implementing navigation with Expo Router, optimizing list and scroll performance, working with animations via Reanimated, handling platform-specific code (iOS/Android), integrating native modules, or structuring Expo projects. Triggers on React Native, Expo, mobile app, iOS app, Android app, cross-platform, native module, FlatList, FlashList, LegendList, Reanimated, Expo Router, mobile performance, app store. Do NOT use for Flutter, web-only React, or backend Node.js tasks.

When the user wants to create UGC ad campaigns, recruit UGC creators, generate AI UGC content, or scale with user-generated content. Also use when the user mentions 'UGC,' 'user-generated content,' 'creator ads,' 'Spark Ads,' 'whitelisting,' 'AI UGC,' 'Arcads,' 'Creatify,' 'creator brief,' or 'UGC testing.' This skill covers the UGC growth framework from creator recruitment through AI-powered scaling. Do NOT use for technical implementation, code review, or software architecture.

When the user wants to define GTM metrics, build a metrics dashboard, measure pipeline efficiency, or track AI product performance. Also use when the user mentions 'GTM metrics,' 'revenue latency,' 'pipeline metrics,' 'TTFV,' 'time-to-first-value,' 'data health,' 'attribution,' 'conversion rate,' 'CAC,' 'LTV,' 'NRR,' 'GTM dashboard,' 'magic number,' 'pipeline velocity,' or 'funnel metrics.' This skill covers GTM measurement from metric selection through dashboard design, including AI-specific cost metrics, attribution models, and weekly review cadences. Do NOT use for technical implementation, code review, or software architecture.

Use when planning legacy system migrations, codebase modernization, monolith decomposition, microservices consolidation, cross-language rewrites, or framework upgrades. Invoke for strangler fig pattern, incremental migration strategy, or refactoring roadmaps. Do NOT use for domain analysis (use domain-analysis), component sizing (use component-identification-sizing), or step-by-step decomposition plans (use decomposition-planning-roadmap).

Runs a sequenced monolith-to-modular pipeline that sizes and inventories components, finds shared domain duplication, addresses flattening and hierarchy issues, analyzes coupling, then groups components into candidate domain-aligned units, with optional embedded DDD strategic analysis for bounded contexts. Use when asking how to split a monolith, size components before extraction, find duplicated domain logic, clean up module hierarchy, measure coupling between modules, or group components into services. Do NOT use for phased extraction roadmaps or prioritization without the prior analysis steps (use decomposition-planning-roadmap after this pipeline), end-to-end legacy migration strategy writeups (use legacy-migration-planner), pure infrastructure capacity sizing, or when you only need DDD without the structural pipeline (install domain-analysis standalone).

Use when a question, decision, plan, tradeoff, or claim needs a rigorous verdict and one perspective is not enough. Spawns a panel of 3 to 5 subagent jurors that form independent blind opinions, deliberate anonymously under an anti-anchoring and anti-sycophancy protocol, and return one committed verdict with confidence, preserved dissent, and a concrete next action. Domain-agnostic across engineering, architecture, data, product, hiring, strategy, vendor choice, build-vs-buy, and research design. Trigger phrases include "convene a jury", "have agents debate and decide", "get a panel to decide", "multi-agent decision", "stress-test this and decide", "monte um juri", "tribunal de agentes", "painel para decidir". Do NOT use to only critique without deciding (use the-fool for that), to build a plan or write the solution itself, or for simple factual lookups.